Unraveling the Threads of Unconscious Intentions in Relationship Conflicts

Unraveling the Threads of Unconscious Intentions in Relationship Conflicts

Conflicts in a romantic relationship are often steered by elements we are not consciously aware of.

We cannot always justify our actions by saying “it was just for fun” or explain that our intentions were different. This holds true even in romantic relationships, as there are consequences to our actions within the boundaries of both law and ethics. A psychologist and an ethics professor shed light on this matter.

There is a tendency to measure everything ethically based on intention. In other words, as long as the intention was good, most things tend to be acceptable. Phrases like “Well, it wasn’t my intention…” or “It wasn’t meant to…” are common, reflecting our belief that as long as it wasn’t deliberate, we have considerable leeway. But is it really that simple?

Can we make jokes, raise our voices, forget agreements, hurt others, steamroll over them, be too busy to help, or even – in the extreme – cause harm, all while hiding behind the excuse that “it wasn’t our intention”?

Regardless of how pure our intentions are, our actions can cause significant harm. Anyone who has yelled at their children, made jokes at a friend’s expense, or neglected their partner is aware of this.

Consider this extreme example: You meet a friend, notice a fly on her forehead, grab a hammer to swat the fly, but inadvertently end up causing fatal harm.

Afterward, you say, “Well, I just wanted to get rid of the annoying fly from your forehead.” While extreme, this example illustrates the complex relationship between intention and action.

In such a case, it’s unlikely we would say the good intention is sufficient. However, in everyday situations, there are numerous examples where one can debate whether the intention justifies our actions.

Most of us may not identify with this specific act, but it underscores the significance of intention in our society, playing a pivotal role even in our legal system.

Our legal system revolves around the idea that to receive punishment, one must have committed an act that harms others. The law works with “mens rea,” the guilty mind, and “actus reus,” the guilty act.

In legal terms, it’s possible to harm someone (actus reus) without intending to do so (mens rea). To be convicted of a crime, both elements must be present.

Consider a scenario where you’re cutting bread in your kitchen. While doing so, you slip on something (parterapi kommunikation), accidentally thrusting the knife into your husband’s heart.

It’s a terrible act, but from a legal standpoint, there may not be a conscious intention behind it. If you had planned to kill your husband, it would be a criminal act.

“In a legal context, you would not be convicted for that action. As a society, we have made it clear that intention matters when assessing our actions morally and legally”.

Just for Fun

However, examples are also abundant in ordinary everyday life— at work, in relationships, among friends. One example that most people can relate to is the subtle sexism in daily life.

In situations where a female colleague is expected to laugh at a sexist joke or a homosexual colleague has to endure a homophobic remark.

Perhaps the individual might speak up: ‘I am actually a bit hurt by what you just said.’ And the one who made the comment responds, ‘Oh, it was just for fun.’

The example is interesting because it reveals how challenging—and also how commonplace—the moral struggle between intention and action is.

Morally, there is something mitigating about it being just for fun. On the other hand, we are not in doubt about how amoral it would be if the person had said, ‘Yes, you’re hurt; my joke worked.’

But because it was ‘just for fun,’ we can often mitigate the offense by explaining that it was not our intention to harm anyone.

However, there is still a significant ethical problem in our tendency to dismiss individuals who feel offended by a sexist joke, especially when it becomes apparent in the conversation and the other person’s reaction that this is something they have likely experienced before. In such cases, it becomes a double offense to be told that one simply lacks a sense of humor.

There is room for improvement. We could all do more to say, ‘My intention was not to harm you, but I acknowledge that you have been offended.’

When we humans are so concerned about whether we have good intentions, it is primarily because we are very preoccupied with ‘guilt’ and ‘shame.’

Guilt and shame occupy a significant space in the minds of many people, and with guilt and shame comes a sense of responsibility. We strive to avoid feeling guilt and shame because there are hardly worse emotions. Therefore, we go to great lengths to talk about how it was not intentional… It is not by chance that they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.